Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

You said it was likely that the difference between estimated excess deaths and the official covid toll likely means that the actual Covid toll is actually higher than the official covid toll

Yes that PARTLY explains the gap.  I never said it was ALL of the gap in excess deaths.   It’s a combination of 

1) undercount of COVID deaths

2) excess death due to people avoiding going to the hospital 

3) excess deaths as a result of economic conditions (ie suicides, drug overdoses, etc...)

Just now, Phillyterp85 said:

Well then that’s on you for choosing to not inform yourself.  He provides insight from the latest peer reviewed research on a weekly basis.  You’re only doing yourself a disservice by ignoring it.

I’m not ignoring it I just can’t spend the whole of every one of my weekends in an entire year staying caught up on what Eagles fans think of world events 

And anything peer reviewed at this stage...it’s better than nothing but I’m not setting policy based on it.  Better data may come out in a few years and we can look back

Just now, Phillyterp85 said:

Yes that PARTLY explains the gap.  I never said it was ALL of the gap in excess deaths.   It’s a combination of 

1) undercount of COVID deaths

2) excess death due to people avoiding going to the hospital 

3) excess deaths as a result of economic conditions (ie suicides, drug overdoses, etc...)

No the claim wasn’t "partly” anything.  Your claim was that actual covid deaths was likely higher than the official count

you cannot be "partly” higher than the official count.  If the official count is 185k and you think it is likely that the actual count is 185,001 or greater, that’s not a "partly” claim about anything

i think it’s equally likely that the actual number is higher as it is lower

2 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

No the claim wasn’t "partly” anything.  Your claim was that actual covid deaths was likely higher than the official count

you cannot be "partly” higher than the official count.  If the official count is 185k and you think it is likely that the actual count is 185,001 or greater, that’s not a "partly” claim about anything

i think it’s equally likely that the actual number is higher as it is lower

Huh????

Yes the actual amount of COVID deaths is likely higher than the "official” number. I said that this PARTLY explains the gap in excess deaths and the COVID death count.

No, it is not equally likely that the true amount of covid deaths are less than the "official” number.  If that was the case, then the excess death total wouldn’t be 30% HIGHER than the "official” COVID death total.

6 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Huh????

Yes the actual amount of COVID deaths is likely higher than the "official” number. I said that this PARTLY explains the gap in excess deaths and the COVID death count.

No, it is not equally likely that the true amount of covid deaths are less than the "official” number.  If that was the case, then the excess death total wouldn’t be 30% HIGHER than the "official” COVID death total.

But this contains a built in assumption about the causes of excess deaths

Smh...

I’m not sure how you guys can’t even see that there’s a possibility that in order to save 10 people with Coronavirus, the government may have unwittingly killed 3 drug addicts, 1 mental health patient, and say 7 heart patients by redeploying medical resources to a problem that wound up being less serious than we originally thought

1 hour ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

But this contains a built in assumption about the causes of excess deaths

No, not a built in assumption.  But rather logic based on facts and evidence.

58 minutes ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

I’m not sure how you guys can’t even see that there’s a possibility that in order to save 10 people with Coronavirus, the government may have unwittingly killed 3 drug addicts, 1 mental health patient, and say 7 heart patients by redeploying medical resources to a problem that wound up being less serious than we originally thought

Because the math on that logic doesn’t come anywhere CLOSE to adding up.

1 minute ago, Phillyterp85 said:

No, not a built in assumption.  But rather logic based on facts and evidence.

Because the math on that logic doesn’t come anywhere CLOSE to adding up.

Yeah, that's kind of the core issue. I remember seeing his post a page or two back where he said something about how "experts were wrong about the war in iraq, the 2016 election, and telling us to not wear masks" which to him means, that experts (and thus, facts or evidence) can't be trusted. Which of course opens the door to throwing ANY wild assumption on the table to be treated as a serious theory. 

So essentially his view is experts are wrong, and therefor can't be trusted. And my view is, experts -who devote serious time to this- are wrong, so I DEFINITELY shouldn't trust half-arse amateurs seeking to defend their political agendas.

 

12 minutes ago, Lloyd said:

Yeah, that's kind of the core issue. I remember seeing his post a page or two back where he said something about how "experts were wrong about the war in iraq, the 2016 election, and telling us to not wear masks" which to him means, that experts (and thus, facts or evidence) can't be trusted. Which of course opens the door to throwing ANY wild assumption on the table to be treated as a serious theory. 

So essentially his view is experts are wrong, and therefor can't be trusted. And my view is, experts -who devote serious time to this- are wrong, so I DEFINITELY shouldn't trust half-arse amateurs seeking to defend their political agendas.

 

No the theories I trust the least are usually limited to the most hot button issues.  You won’t find me for example questioning leading theories in astrophysics.  Only the theories that get savaged by the political process 

Just now, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

No the theories I trust the least are usually limited to the most hot button issues.  You won’t find me for example questioning leading theories in astrophysics.  Only the theories that get savaged by the political process 

But do you not notice yourself injecting the "political process" into your interpretation of Covid?

Because,- consider this theory - maybe it's you. 

1 minute ago, Lloyd said:

But do you not notice yourself injecting the "political process" into your interpretation of Covid?

Because,- consider this theory - maybe it's you. 

It’s unavoidable when the whole discussion originally starts with you bashing Trump.  Don’t blame me

3 hours ago, VanHammersly said:

Normally I stay away on the weekend.  I'm supposed to be booking a hotel in Savannah right now.  But I'm an idiot and can't help myself.

Schmoopie and I stayed here the day after the eagles-dolphins game last year.  I would recommend it

 

https://www.hyatt.com/en-US/hotel/georgia/andaz-savannah/savrd

4 hours ago, paco said:

Schmoopie and I stayed here the day after the eagles-dolphins game last year.  I would recommend it

 

https://www.hyatt.com/en-US/hotel/georgia/andaz-savannah/savrd

I know that Hyatt. I used to live in Savannah in my 20’s and I sometimes did odd jobs for a rich old lady that lived up on the apartment floor. Funny story about those apartments. That’s where the original Mr. Tennenbaum lived, from the family that inspired The Royal Tennenbaums.  Just like in the movie, he lived in a hotel for years and it was that Hyatt. 

No s***? I wish I knew that prior. 

Tidbit for those that care.  Norway has now passed Sweden in terms of numbers of confirmed cases per 1M people, 15 to 13.  Norway has taken the strict lock down route.  Also the US has now zoomed right past Sweden in terms of deaths per 1M, 582 to 577 (this was equal at 577 last week).

5 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

Tidbit for those that care.  Norway has now passed Sweden in terms of numbers of confirmed cases per 1M people, 15 to 13.  Norway has taken the strict lock down route.  Also the US has now zoomed right past Sweden in terms of deaths per 1M, 582 to 577 (this was equal at 577 last week).

Now that is interesting, especially the Norway part.  US has too many other variables like density and culture but Norway...

5 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

Tidbit for those that care.  Norway has now passed Sweden in terms of numbers of confirmed cases per 1M people, 15 to 13.  Norway has taken the strict lock down route.  Also the US has now zoomed right past Sweden in terms of deaths per 1M, 582 to 577 (this was equal at 577 last week).

We know.  You love your country.

5 minutes ago, paco said:

We know.  You love your country.

Ain’t that swell 

18 minutes ago, dawkins4prez said:

Now that is interesting, especially the Norway part.  US has too many other variables like density and culture but Norway...

the difference between 13 and 15 in confirmed cases / million (assuming this is the current active) is pretty negligible. both are low. Norway's positive case number appears to be ticking up slightly, Sweden's has been trending down a bit. 

For reference, the US is at around 125 / million. 

53 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

the difference between 13 and 15 in confirmed cases / million (assuming this is the current active) is pretty negligible. both are low. Norway's positive case number appears to be ticking up slightly, Sweden's has been trending down a bit. 

For reference, the US is at around 125 / million. 

Per week to be clear. Yeah those numbers are low. The interesting part is where the two countries are given their very different strategies to date. 

21 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Per week to be clear. Yeah those numbers are low. The interesting part is where the two countries are given their very different strategies to date. 

Sure, but number around positive cases have so many variables that if numbers are that comparable it's basically a wash. Sweden is still reporting some deaths, Norway is barely reporting any. Either way both populations appear to be in comparable situations, Norway just didn't have that big glut of cases and fatalities earlier in the outbreak.

Schools opening and flu season is going to make a difference I think. We'll see if enough Swedes have some measure of immunity to keep numbers down. You don't have to reach herd immunity for it to have some kind of impact, if the number of people who have the antibodies around Stockholm is accurate that should at least reduce the reproduction number.

3 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

the difference between 13 and 15 in confirmed cases / million (assuming this is the current active) is pretty negligible. both are low. Norway's positive case number appears to be ticking up slightly, Sweden's has been trending down a bit. 

For reference, the US is at around 125 / million. 

Yeah but that's where pop density comes into play.  Sweden has the pop density of Minnesota or Mississsipi (25/sqkm).  No matter what Sweden proves with their lockdown management it will never be a true case study of what the US with its high pop mega urban sprawls had to do.

4 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Sure, but number around positive cases have so many variables that if numbers are that comparable it's basically a wash. Sweden is still reporting some deaths, Norway is barely reporting any. Either way both populations appear to be in comparable situations, Norway just didn't have that big glut of cases and fatalities earlier in the outbreak.

Schools opening and flu season is going to make a difference I think. We'll see if enough Swedes have some measure of immunity to keep numbers down. You don't have to reach herd immunity for it to have some kind of impact, if the number of people who have the antibodies around Stockholm is accurate that should at least reduce the reproduction number.

Agreed, the variables in all the numbers in every category make this entire thing impossible to fully judge.  Not to mention the fact that we are only in the beginning.

None the less, the part that MIGHT be interesting is the lack of spread in Sweden. Everything is essentially back to fully open minus crowds and has been for close to three months.  Buses are full, restaurants the same, no masks, etc.  What should we be expecting?  I'm not saying I know the answer.